Twist

I will start out by saying that I completely agree, this film clearly struggles with finding an audience and is clearly confused with who it's meant to appeal to. The violence it's "watered down/cartoonish" enough for a PG rating but with all the swearing (frequent uses of the four letter words including an F bomb) it wouldn't get a PG rating in the US. Another thing I found strange was the soundtrack which kept jumping between modern day hip hop and 90s-00s britpop, which further raised the question...Who is this film meant to appeal to?

I would in no way call this movie terrible as many of the reviews suggest. It's your standard paint by numbers art caper set to the story of Oliver Twist with a ridiculous amount of parkour added in. Parts of the movie are fun but nothing is really original, it feels like the type of movie you could watch on TV and not feel like you wasted your time. That's the level of entertainment I received from it at least...

Liked the idea of Oliver Twist being set in modern times, but this is poorly executed. The makers have tried way too hard to be gritty and street, so much so that it's like a parody of gangsta films. I mean, David Walliams makes an appearance for goodness sake. Throwing in a soundtrack featuring 90's Brit bands doesn't make it edgy either. Weak storyline, poor acting and unconvincing 'criminals' With the likes of Headey and Caine in it, it really should have been better.

Don't know who the target audience was but this felt very 'teenager' orientated. Has some big names but some mediocre acting. It was just neither something original, nor clever, using ideas that have been down before. Just kind of bland, really. Loved Headey in GOT but not at all in this. Hope she doesn't end up doing crap like this. Just didn't really care for it. Was mostly bored. Had higher expectations.

Updating the classics has always been a double edged sword. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. In this adaptation Dicken's novel is transported to modern London with street smart kids working for an irrascible Fagin played by Michael Caine. Large chunks are missed out of the original and characters are adjusted. Sykes is a woman and Nancy is the same age as Oliver. Taken as a stand alone this movie is not a bad effort. Some of the running over London's rooftops is good fun. Where the movie suffers is in continuity. Where are we in Dickens script.....or otherwise. But the only real problem is the portrayal of Sykes. Playing him as a Lesbian woman is quite a good idea but she is just not nasty enough. Mean in spirit, action and words but really just another thug with a gun. Sykes in the book or portrayed by Reed was a vicious bully but also a very complicated charactacter. This new Sykes tries to be nasty but comes across as flat and one dimentional. I enjoyed the movie, especially the portrayal of a modern street gang, but all seriously lacking the guts of the original.

I didn't really know what to expect with this movie but I was still underwhelmed by it.

It was extremely dull and just dead behind the eyes. I found it to be a chore to sit though.

I don't want to be horrible but the acting was absolutely awful. It was so lifeless and just really bad. Every single actor was bad.

Also a warning that most of this film is just running sequences that normally end up on rooftops. I'm pretty sure that some parts were shot on a go pro.

It also had this like sugary sweetness undertone which clashed so much with the "English crime" tone. It was like a kids movie but about a gang in London?

It was really bad.